vows and i love them very much. >> how much did you love the food from the guys at master built? if you like their recipes, smokers, grillers, go to master built.com. >> who wants to help her pack up? thanks so much for watching. have a great weekend. bill and dana are next. >> bill: good morning at 9:00. supreme court term like none before in the homestretch. as of now it is the second to last day for decisions from the high court as we expect big ones at 10:00 a.m. eastern time and we say good morning. we had one yesterday. hello to you at home. >> dana: i'm dana perino and this is "america's newsroom." this is not a drill anymore because we've been -- the supreme court has been announcing for the last couple of weeks. the big cases we've been wanting to see now those are the only ones left. today and monday will be really big days on this. >> bill: as we wait for this one hour from now.

>> dana: in the meantime we're expecting a series of rapid fire decision in the final days of the term. among those still to come the case of a high school football coach fired for praying on the field and attempt to stop president biden from -- >> whether or not regulations should be decided by the white house or the job of congress. looming over all of this a potentially transformative decision on abortion. the court weighing the fate of a 15-week ban on to procedure from the state of mississippi. that decision has the potential to overturn roe v. wade which would end nearly 50 years of precedence. >> dana: reaction is pouring in after the court decided a new york law restricting guns in public was in violation of the second amendment. for more on that we go to chief legal correspondent shannon bream in washington a lot of takes, yesterday, a lot of hot takes. give us your reasons and

informed takes this morning. >> listen, it was definitely an expansive second amendment-friendly decision for those who are gun rights advocates. they say they feel is vindicated. it has been years since the court took up a second amendment case. you haven't been treated as a second class right and he said there is no reason you should have to ask permission to exercise a constitutional right from the government before you can exercise it. that was his reasoning. what he said is that new york law which says you have to show some kind of specialized or specific threat beyond the average citizen does not comport with the constitution and the second amendment. what it means is that yes, states and will be able to have licensing requirements but everybody gets a background check or everybody has to be a certain age. those kinds of things. there can't be subjective judgment where some people get the license and others don't.

the duke university center on firearms law looked into this and said yeah, it will affect probably six states and locations including d.c. but that's 25% of the u.s. population where you will see some of these laws. california is a big place i watch. they have to modify them or have legal challenges to their laws as well. that one is off the plate and now we wait. we have nine left at 10:00 a.m. eastern we will get we don't know how many or which ones. i have never gotten nine opinions in a day. we expect they'll be scattered over next week and adding days beyond monday which is set for the official end of the supreme court term. >> bill: here are the following cases, the four big ones out of the nine remaining the upcoming decisions. these are the following questions before the court. case number one immigration asylum. remain in texas, does the biden administration have the power

to end trump's policy remain in mexico. a law in effect right now and challenged by other courts and now it is still in place. that's one of the big four that we're waiting on. here is another one that originates from the state of washington and deals with prayer in public school, prayer in public places. is a public school employee's prayer protected free speech during school? a coach sk challenged by a parent after the coach was praying on the field after games. he lost his job because of it. case three deals directly with climate change. if the justices were to side with the challengers out of west virginia. can the e.p.a. require states to reduce carbon emissions to control global warming or is that the job of congress and not the executive branch? we'll watch for a decision on that. this is the big one that everybody is talking about and waiting for out of the state of mississippi. dobbs versus jackson. here is the question before the

court. should roe v. wade be overturned and states be allowed to ban abortions? we might get it today. we might get it monday. dana, this was the day that originally was not on the schedule. they added it to the docket to deliver decisions today. we're coming down to the wire. yesterday we were given four. i think the previous day was on five cases. >> dana: so it's interesting when shannon said they might add days next week. people are trying to figure out what is their strategy. waiting to do the roe decision until the justices are finished and out of town or want security to be in place or do it today before the weekend? it is unclear. we'll be here for it all. >> bill: it is their call. let's bring in lawrence jones to talk about the decision from yesterday. big decisions take a while to soak in and absorb and take a moment to understand what it

means to americans. >> well, i think when you look at new yorkers you have the most restrictive gun laws on the books right now. you have a mayor's office that is literally going after guns every single day trying to get the criminals but again you keep seeing the shootings and violent ciemg going up. after you've had the state do all that they can do. cops aren't on the job that much. they can't fill police academies. >> hochul said it will be the wild, wild west. it already is. law abiding citizens can't get guns. >> dana: mayor adams echoed her point. call for number 2. >> this decision has made every single one of us less safe from gun violence. we cannot allow new york to

become the wild, wild west. that is unacceptable. >> bill: he said it today on another cable network. what new york is considering enacting new laws to create gun-free zones like subways and sports stadiums. i would assume that would be challenged in a court decision. >> you already can't have a gun or knife or a subway. maybe i'm missing something. part of the reason i moved back to texas because it got so bad here. the first place i've moved. lived in d.c. outside of virginia and texas i was always able to carry. nothing to do with being in public life. if the criminals feel empowered the people when they commit crimes with gun the d.a.s let them back on the street. maybe i'm missing something. maybe -- we don't see that on all the major cities so the

law-abiding citizen if they can't trust the mayor or d*rk d.a. to protect them. cops not on the job i'm not advocating for vigilante justice but they should be able to protect themselves if the people entrusted to keep them safe aren't doing the job. the mayor and governor have a problem with this. they continue to say the wild, wild west. it is already bad. it can't be worse than what we're experiencing right now in all a major cities. >> dana: another problem is the media reaction because this was actually -- they aren't looking at what the question was in front of the supreme court. they just assume now that everyone in the world will be handing out guns like you get a covid test in the mail. that's not how it works. listen to this montage we put together. >> it seems stupid. it is worse than that. it is such a middle finger to new york. >> here comes this decision that dramatically whittles away what the reasonable restrictions are even from a

mayoral and public safety standpoint. >> the court is just another politicized, partisan instrument. >> dana: if it had gone the other way they would have a different position. the court is only legitimate if it agrees with them? >> not just that. they have the ability to have protection when they go places. they have security details. if we're threatened, fox news will put us under protection, right? everyday citizens don't have that luxury and we see it from the squad. they don't want us to carry guns but all of them are using their campaign contributions and the people that sent them there to keep them protected. stacey abrams all of a sudden has been for defund the police the entire time. now she wants to rehire the cops and pay them more. i don't think we really understand the implications from this past two to three years of defund the cop movement. because you turn it back on doesn't mean citizens will be

more safe. the only option that we have right now is to defend ourselves. >> bill: the law in new york stood for 100 years and no longer. a lot of times in new york and the rest of the country maybe doesn't understand. it is six months, an interview and on and on it goes. now this is -- what clarence thomas said if you don't like our decision, change the amendment in the constitution. >> they will try to -- they don't believe in the court. after they said institution -- protect the institution they'll try to find a workaround against the court. people should note that in the next election. >> dana: see you tomorrow night at 10:00 p.m. thank you. 15 republicans voted yes. house g.o.p. leadership is urging members to vote no.

far left democrats may not support it for not going far enough after the deadly shooting last month in uvalde, texas that killed 19 students and 2 teachers. delays and cancellations becoming routine heading to summer travel season. 8,000 flights have been canceled in the past week alone and major airlines are scaling back schedules more. united airlines cutting 20% of flights from newark airport. lydia hu is live for us. frustrated passengers, i imagine. >> absolutely. we actually just heard a passenger traveler tell his family we have to say a little prayer this morning that our flight is not canceled and the sense of what the mood is like at newark. a lot of nervous travelers hoping to make their flight because we've seen so many cancellations in the past week. nearly 8,000 flights leaving traveling into or traveling within the u.s. canceled in the

past week. 168% increase over the same week last year. while many air carriers are blaming the backlog in flights on rising demand or weather and air traffic control issues some pilots accuse the airlines of overscheduling flights. allied pilots association represents 14,000 pilots that work for american airlines is calling on the federal aviation administration to investigate airline scheduling practices. >> as pilots, we're beyond exhausted. they are trying to get us to fly to the maximum that the faa has. bad news is it means that flights cancel. when you schedule an airline to the max you will have failures. >> here in newark, united airlines just announced they will be cancelling 50 daily departures from this airport

starting after july 4th. it has nothing to do with staffing shortages but still that news comes as cancellations continue to mount. there are already 7% of flights departing out of newark international airport canceled today. more than 400 flights across the country already canceled for today. that number has already been growing throughout the morning. we'll continue to track that, dana. >> dana: a lot of repercussions for people of personal travel and business travel as well. thank you. >> bill: we have a fox news alert now from the border. arrests surging to record levels. how many people are slipping through the cracks? that's a great question. what the overwhelmed border patrol is telling us. >> dana: is the white house taking the energy crisis seriously enough? >> bill: the president caught on camera relying on a hyper specific cheap sheet for a meengt. even the word you capitalized.

talk about it in harold ford junior and guy benson. look at that team. look at those men. no, he's seizing the moment with merrill. moving his money into his investment account in real time and that's... how you collect coins. your money never stops working for you with merrill, a bank of america company.

dad, when is the future? um, oh wow. um, the future is, uh, what's ahead of us. i don't get it. yeah. maybe this will help. so now we're in the present. and now... we're in the future.

the all-electric chevy bolt euv with available super cruise™ for hands-free driving. - dad. - yeah? do fish get thirsty? eh. find new answers. find new roads. chevrolet. - i'm norm. - i'm szasz. [norm] and we live in columbia, missouri. we do consulting, but we also write. [szasz] we take care of ourselves constantly; it's important. we walk three to five times a week, a couple miles at a time. - we've both been taking prevagen for a little more than 11 years now. after about 30 days of taking it, we noticed clarity that we didn't notice before. - it's still helping me. i still notice a difference. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

>> bill: president biden accidentally revealing a cheat sheet at a white house meeting yesterday and it's easy to see the following. he held it up, the cameras caught it with instructions like you and your take a seat. you and your in all caps repeatedly. it's happened before. guy benson, political editor town hall.com and harold ford junior, co-host of the five and former tennessee congressman. whose alarm clock was working this morning. great to have you here.

a quick clip. joe cunningham is a democrat in south carolina, former congressman. one term. running for governor and pretty much called out joe biden and his age on camera on cnn. listen. >> i think we need to have a new vision, new leadership, and this isn't about personal biden, but he will be 82 at the time of the next election. if he served out a second term he would be 86 years old. i'm not sure if any of us know of any 86-year-olds who should be running our country. >> bill: he said the quiet part out loud. >> a lot of people are saying that. it is now the out loud part out loud and all caps. certain words could have maybe added to the list do not flash this card towards camera. now here we are talking about it. look, i've emceed any number of events and they give you a line by line tiktok with your cues, that's not unusual.

also presidents are scheduled to within an inch of their life and going from one event to another and they need helpful reminders. i'm not surprised that this type of thing happens. i think it is probably standard operating procedure to some extent. this specifically feels a little different. it's a little much. >> dana: in some ways it is overstaffing, too. maybe he needs it or not. when it says you enter the room and say hello. that's standard. but sometimes they handle him a little too close. >> i wish they would handle the -- some of the policy acuity. when we talk about mental and physical acuity, we wouldn't be talking so much about that if the policy was right on energy. if the policy was right on the border. if the policy was right on crime. i'm not bothered like guy is. the specific things the president is on a schedule. maybe a little much i agree some of the things you would think he would not just what to do. as i look at the headlines this

morning i'm pleased that granholm met with energy executives. there needs to be a different approach. she said it was constructive. i hope the president will weigh in. i was alarmed this morning saying the approval rating of the supreme court of the united states has sunk to 25%. this institutional standing and big institutions in government standing doesn't help when the president and these kinds of things are happening but it doesn't help when the country loses faith in institution of the three the legislative, executive and courts where they have always had an elevated. hopefully we can get at that. >> bill: speaking of numbers, you know how many pieces written in the past two weeks about telling joe biden this is it. literally publicly trying to convince him to concede he won't run for a second term. that's his call, right, ultimately he has to decide. university of new hampshire poll found only 9% of likely voters deaf niftily want president biden to run again.

20% say he should probably run. it was among democrats, too, guy. >> this poll got a lot of attention this week because it was trump and desantis and republican primary years down the line. that's so hypothetical and premature. this is not, though. this is right now. what people are seeing now. a lot of democrats and americans broadly don't want this president to run again. and then the vice president in the same poll is underwater by 41 points on favorability. you look at the future for the democratic party right now and i think there are some choppy seas ahead. they might be trying to push one guy out but then who is next? is that the path they want to go down? we'll see. >> dana: it's remarkable in a week or two we've gone from the press secretary saying biden is running again to now democrats openly saying he shouldn't run again. too old to run again and you

have a mini primary happening. you had kamala harris go to south carolina. you had prytzger go to new hampshire, iowa. governor newsom in california has an interview with the atlantic saying see probably going to be in as well. >> there is nothing wrong with a little competition in parties. >> dana: even at this point for president biden >> the polling around desantis and trump. desantis is beating the former president in straw polls around the country. probably irritating the former president. on the democratic side no doubt the policy has to get right. i've said it and say it again. if the policy would right people wouldn't care about stumbling over words or a cheat sheet. >> bill: drilling for oil instead of wind turbines. >> i would have prioritized. there are things the president needs to get a domino effect going and push one or two over for the country's sake not just

for his party's sake but for the country's sake. if he is able to do that we might be having a different conversation in two months. i have not met guy in person. we've been on television many times. great to meet you. >> like we know each other. now we do. >> dana: we bring people together. >> you were hilarious the other night. >> dana: we worked at it. good to see you. as we await a major supreme court opinion on abortion emergency funding to protect justices from possible violence and straight ahead the white house saying it is a priority for president biden but his schedule tells a different story. >> the president isn't doing everything he can to bring gas prices down, is he? >> i feel like there is a -- is there something else to the question?

>> there is a lot to the question. >> oh. moderate to severe eczema still disrupts my skin. despite treatment it disrupts my skin with itch. it disrupts my skin with rash. but now, i can disrupt eczema with rinvoq. rinvoq is not a steroid, topical, or injection. it's one pill, once a day, that's effective without topical steroids. many taking rinvoq saw clear or almost-clear skin while some saw up to 100% clear skin. plus, they felt fast itch relief some as early as 1 week. that's rinvoq relief. rinvoq can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. serious infections and blood clots, some fatal, cancers including lymphoma and skin cancer, death, heart attack, stroke, and tears in the stomach or intestines occurred. people 50 and older with at least one heart disease

risk factor have higher risks. don't take if allergic to rinvoq, as serious reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you are or may become pregnant. disrupt the itch and rash of eczema. talk to your eczema specialist about rinvoq. learn how abbvie (mom allen) verizon just gave us all a brand new iphone 13. can help you save. (dad allen) we've been customers for years. (dad brown) i thought new phones were for new customers? we got iphone 13s, too. switched to verizon two minutes ago. (mom brown) ours were busted and we still got a shiny new one. (boy brown) check it out! (dad allen) so, wait. everybody gets the same great deal? (mom allen) i think that's the point. (vo) now everyone can get a new iphone 13 on us on america's most reliable 5g network. (allen kid) can i have a phone? (vo) for every customer. current, new, everyone. to show the love.

why choose proven quality sleep from the sleep number 360 smart bed? because it can gently raise your partner's head to help relieve snoring. ah. that's better. and can help you get almost 30 minutes more restful sleep per night. the queen sleep number 360 c2 smart bed is only $899. plus 0% interest for 36 months. ends monday.

about two years ago i realized that jade was overweight. i wish i would have introduced the fresh food a lot sooner. after farmer's dog she's a much healthier weight. she's a lot more active. and she's able to join us on our adventures. get started at longlivedogs.com like many families, anthe auburns value times ospent together.s. to share wisdom... i got some of my gold before i came to this country. i got some of my gold before you passed the bread. encourage one another... i can buy gold for this?! you can buy gold for this. and talk about life's wins and misses. responsibly sourced like my gold but not responsibly cooked. because at the end of the day, nothing keeps it all together quite like - gold. visit invest.gold to see how gold is everyone's asset.

>> he is meeting with people selling wind tour pine equipment and not oil ceos. how did that help lower gas prices >> let me step back for a second. you are asking me a question. >> how does that lower gas prices? you said he has done everything in his power. they were a mile away. >> bill: white house press secretary doing battle on gas prices and the company president biden chose to keep yesterday. his energy secretary sat down with oil execs a mile from the white house. he met with the wind energy executive at the white house. hillary vaughn. >> the president had the very companies show up to his

neighborhoods that he says for months has the power to lower the price at the pump but are not doing so. he passed up an opportunity to say that to their faces. instead, executives from exxon, chevron, marathon and phillips 66 got a face-to-face with the energy secretary while the white house defends the president's decision yesterday to instead sail into a meeting with offshore wind ceos and blow off a meeting with gas companies. >> the president took action. he took action. he made a historic choice to tap the strategic petroleum reserve. one million barrels a day. it does matter that the secretary of energy, which is her purview, that's her portfolio, to meet with the oil executives that she does on a pretty regular basis. >> some people in the oil and gas industry are not buying it. >> i wish someone would write on his cheat sheet get out of the way and let the oil and gas

industry do what they need to do. we don't have an emergency shortage of wind supply but we have a shortage of diesel and gasoline and the reality is it's a hard decision and a shame the president chose to go to the wind meeting rather than the more difficult meeting. >> criticism for saudi arabia also and face time with the crown prince. oil and gas want to get on his calendar writing this. before you board air force one for the middle east take another look at made in america energy, american made energy solutions are beneath our feet and we urge you to reconsider the immense potential of u.s. oil and natural gas resources that are the envy of the world to benefit american families, the u.s. economy and our national security. and sources inside the room yesterday, bill, tell me this morning that they do feel like it was a bit of a bait and switch. they expected when they got the

white house invitation the president would be there. they were disappointed and very unhappy yesterday to find out that the president would not even be stopping by. >> bill: i can imagine especially after the strongly worded letters earlier in the week. thank you from the north lawn, hillary vaughn. >> dana: the white house may want gas prices to come down fast but it may mean supporting gas and oil production. could sides agree on a solution? let's bring in the founder of rap don energy. you helped me learn about energy back then. it is hard for me to believe that the president of the united states would have oil executives in town during the middle of a gas crisis but send his secretary of energy to meet with them while he met with the energy folks. how will that solve anything and bring down prices? >> it's really not, dana. even to their credit, even jimmy carter and you have to go

back to jimmy carter for a president under this much pressure on energy. even jimmy carter at the end decontrolled prices and started to undo some of the mistakes made. president obama, you know, understood we need all forms of energy and transitions take many decades. we're in a new place now. a place where the president wants the impossible. he wants instant oil and diesel and gas from an industry that is operating at full speed. can't do it. so he can't get what's impossible and he is into the blame game and not showing up at the meeting. it is unfortunate we are now in the new era here. >> dana: the other thing is this crisis has been building and it's almost as if they say the problem isn't really -- doesn't really exist or it's temporary. the problem is so exacerbated. you look at, this is gas prices over time. so in april of 2020 middle of the pandemic $1.77 for a gallon of gas. you get to february of 2022 it is up at $4.33 and now $4.86.

it is starting to have an effect on the actual economy but we know it's hurting families and business owners and prices are rising and contributing to inflation. is there anything on the table right now that the oil industry has suggested in letters to the president or in meeting with secretary granholm that would actually have an effect on these prices if the president were willing to do it today? >> in the short term we're only talking about things that can help a dime or a nickel. easing smog regulations. jones act waivers. really as we know energy is a long-term business. the industry has lots of good ideas to make sure we aren't in this situation in coming years. stop the prohibition on pipelines. open up to federal leasing. pull back the regulators looking to harass the industry on greenhouse gases and so forth. energy is a long term business. you can't fix years of neglect overnight. >> dana: can he fix it by going

to see the saudis instead of meeting with our own oil executives? what do you think of that meeting? >> not really. the saudis have given a concession already. earlier they said we'll speed up production increases. they may say when he goes later this year, if necessary, we'll increase production faster. this is just the tough math. not a lot of spare production capacity in saudi arabia and uae even if they go all in. it's not clear it would bring gasoline prices down. the problem is russia is the largest oil exporter and the disruption of russian oil experts which is unfolding and being discounted in current prices is a problem too big for even saudi arabia to solve. >> dana: last question here how do you answer people who would say looks like the oil companies are taking advantage of drivers out there by charging these prices? >> malarkey. i wrote a book on the history of oil markets. the first hearing was in 1920, the fcc investigated this and

investigate it all the time. bush administration looked at it. every administration and never found gouging. what it is, too much strong demand, strapped and strained supply system, and big disruption risk. it is supply and demand, not gouging. >> dana: he has a way to explain things so well. thank you. >> bill: agents overwhelmed at the border. hundreds of migrants wandering on the side of a texas highway. more on this video in a moment. five u.s. marines killed in a tragic crash earlier this month. how tunnel to towers is helping their families, the founder and ceo is frank siller and he is here to help and he is next. >> dana: very nice. ♪♪♪ think he's posting about all that ancient roman coinage? no, he's seizing the moment with merrill. moving his money into his investment account in real time and that's...

how you collect coins. your money never stops working for you with merrill, a bank of america company. okay everyone, our mission is to provide complete balanced nutrition for strength and energy. woo hoo! ensure, complete balanced nutrition with 27 vitamins and minerals. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ ♪ hi, i'm denise. i lost over 22 pounds with golo. i've done the work. years and years of fighting and fighting and never getting the results. golo is the only thing that gave me this.

it gave me back me. when you're tired of looking at your tired old bath, we fit your style, with hundreds of design options. bath fitter. it just fits. visit bathfitter.com to book your free consultation. new projects means new project managers. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. when you sponsor a job, you immediately get your shortlist of quality candidates, whose resumes on indeed match your job criteria. visit indeed.com/hire and get started today. the tempur-pedic breeze° makes sleep...feel cool. because the tempur-breeze° transfers heat away from your body... ...so you feel cool, night after night. for a limited time, save $500 on all tempur-breeze°™ mattresses. you never know what opportunities save $500 on all life will send your way. but if you have moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis or psoriatic arthritis, enbrel can help you say i'm in for what's next.

ready to create a bigger world? -i'm in. ready to earn that “world's greatest dad” mug? -i'm in. care to play a bigger role in this community? -i'm in. enbrel helps relieve joint pain, helps stop permanent joint damage, and helps skin get clearer in psoriatic arthritis. with less pain, you're free to join in. enbrel may lower your ability to fight infections. serious, sometimes fatal events including infections, tuberculosis, lymphoma, other cancers, nervous system and blood disorders, and allergic reactions have occurred. tell your doctor if you've been someplace where fungal infections are common or if you're prone to infections, have cuts or sores, have hepatitis b, have been treated for heart failure or if you have persistent fever, bruising, bleeding, or paleness. don't start enbrel if you have an infection like the flu. when opportunities come your way, be ready to say i'm in for what's next. ask your doctor about enbrel.

>> dana: record numbers of migrants on the southern border. a law enforcement source sharing this video alongside a texas highway, hundreds of people suspected of entering the country illegally. casey stiegel is live at the southern border in la joya, texas. >> good morning. that video was shot late yesterday afternoon near eagle pass, texas, which is part of the del rio sector for border patrol and that is one sector that has been hit especially hard with the number of large groups that are crossing, we're still trying to flush out all of the details from law enforcement but in terms of exact numbers and how far this was from where it is believed they cross is still unknown. but it is alongside what looks like a highway and it is a place that you don't typically see something like that. outside of texas meantime

agents in yuma, arizona have been especially overwhelmed. they experienced a 345% increase in migrant encounters this year compared to last not including those who do successfully evade law enforcement. >> look at the numbers. when you look at the number of gotaways, one million gotaways since this president has been in office. he has released another little over a million people. >> dhs says it's still investigating the alleged migrant whipping incident last september in del rio involving the agents on horse back and haitian migrants. former b.p. brass center a letter to the d.h.s. secretary advising him not to unfairly discipline those agents because they were cleared of criminal wrongdoing suggesting that if they do discipline them, it

would be simply politically motivated. dana. >> dana: casey, thank you. >> bill: now to the -- americans, tunnel to towers helping fallen marines killed earlier in the month when their osprey aircraft crashed during a training mission outside san diego. frank siller the founder of tunnel to towers is here. doing great work. tell us what you can do for these families who leave behind wives and very young children. >> these marines are just our men and women in uniform protect us every day but they have to train to get ready to go overseas and we have many overseas in different places at all times making sure we're safe here. a helicopter went down two weeks ago and lost five u.s. marines, two had a family and

children left behind. captain john sax and corporal rasmussen. >> bill: sax's wife was pregnant with their second child and a 20-month-old daughter. the son of a former dodger second baseman, steve sax, a legend in l.a. rasmussen was 21 out of johnson, wyoming. leaves behind a wife and a son reed not even one year old. >> they were high school sweethearts. you hear this so often. it is incredible the sacrifice these families make. just not the service member that serves bust the whole family that serves and as americans, in the tunnel to towers foundation, you know this bill and dana, you know about our foundation. we made a promise to take care of the families left behind. your viewers know it and last

year alone we did over 200 families between police officers, firefighters and gold star families plus catastrophicly injured. >> dana: knowing about the foundation to be the recipient of the help must be a shock. >> they are shocked. but to every single one of them they worry and think how will i stay in the home? these are very young couples. >> bill: you pick up their payments. >> we pay off their mortgages. we start by picking up the payments so they don't have to worry about that. if they don't have a home, we build them a home. so in gold star families and military they go from base to base they don't have a home. so we come in and step in. >> dana: it is not just for the military. we've been talking a lot about the two police officers who were killed in el monte, california and your help extends to them as well.

>> yes. corporal michael and officer joseph santana both leave behind families, shot and killed. some crazy prison who should have been kept in jail, a criminal and they let him back out and the two families are now without their loved one and we earlier this week said we'll take care of them also. we were on fox and we raised a lot of money but here is the thing. i said to you before. we need your help, go to t2t .org for as little as $11 a month. you guys do it. we need over a million americans to do it. we could take care of all the families that sacrifice for us. >> bill: t2t.org. you had a big event earlier in the week. you've been doing it every year for seven years now i think. at liberty golf course across from the hudson river. frank, it was so cool to always meet the companies across this

country who come together to do things like build the sprinkler system in these homes and to meet them and think about what their contribution means to you and to so many. it is cool to see. >> home depot, general motors have been with us from the beginning. a.p.i. was the sprinkler company. these are guys to help men and women who gave their bodies for their country. the smart homes. carpet one, mohawk. so many great companies that help us. it's the great americans at $11 a month that make a difference. >> dana: you don't waste a dollar. >> no, we don't. >> dana: a live look at the supreme court we're we awaiting some blockbuster decisions scheduled to announce opinions in 10 minutes. we're ready and monitoring it as it happens. critics pouncing on president biden for relying on this little cheat sheet telling him

when to stand up and sit down. white house says it's standard procedure. we'll run it by reince priebus coming up, a former chief of staff. announcer: type 2 diabetes? discover the power of 3 in the ozempic® tri-zone. in my ozempic® tri-zone, i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. announcer: ozempic® provides powerful a1c reduction. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. and you may lose weight. adults lost up to 14 pounds. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right

away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. join the millions already taking ozempic®. ask your health care provider about the ozempic® tri-zone. announcer: you may pay as little as $25 for a 3-month prescription. only at vanguard you're more than just an investor you're an owner. that means that your priorities are ours too. our interactive tools and advice can help you build a future for the ones you love. that'swhat if i sleep hot?hip. ...or cold?

can help you build a future for the ones you love. no problem. the sleep number 360 smart bed is temperature balancing, so you both stay comfortable and can help you get almost 30 minutes more restful sleep per night. the queen sleep number 360 c2 smart bed is only $899. plus, 0% interest for 36 months. ends monday.

>> dana: advances in facial recognition, i believe, technology business for one company that erases unwanted photos from the internet but not without risk. douglas kennedy with the story. waiting to hear this. >> software that could transform society making it very difficult for those who try to keep private things private. what you do is about to become really important to a lot more people. >> i think everyone's privacy is at risk right now. literally everybody. >> rob runs delete me, a service that erases unwanted

photos from the internet. now new advances in facial recognition technology are poised to put his industry in overdrive. >> everybody can be accessed now just with a photo of their face walking down the street and that is scary. >> one stores billions of the images from the internet and already run into problems with regulators in canada, australia, and england for violating privacy laws. another business searches only publicly-available sites. just upload a picture and within seconds every image that matches that photo is displayed including explicit content. >> it is a game-changing image search "the new york times" recently called alarmingly accurate. so the fear is you are now providing this alarmingly accurate information that is tailor made for stalkers and ex

tore shunists. >> we provide information only from publicly available website. it does not search social media. therefore every single user is already publicly available. >> this is another company. he acknowledges the risks with his software but says it can also do good including finding missing persons and exposing scams. >> you believe it can stop exploitation by identifying sex traffickers. >> absolutely. because if these people are on photos or participating in the videos and their image can be taken, our tool has capacity to be used to identify those people. >> identify them and anyone in the photo which is another reminder for everyone to be careful around cameras. >> you have to assume now that

every picture you are in could end up in a search engine. >> will end up in a search engine and facial recognition ready. >> facial recognition ready on the internet which he says means the end of privacy everywhere else. that's it from here. back to you dana and bill. >> dana: you will spark a big debate between hemmer and me. thank you so much. >> bill: you already have. biden administration reaching a deal this week to cancel $6 billion in student loan debt for about 200,000 borrowers. those students claim they were defrauded by their colleges, most of them for profit school. it comes weeks after the administration said it would cancel $6 billion in debt that anybody attended corinthian colleges. >> dana: i want to know more about that. where is the prosecution, right? if there was fraud, i would love to know what the department of justice is doing. >> bill: this administration wants to do it and getting a

lot of pressure from a lot of liberal and progressive sources to remove a lot of student loan debt but joe biden hasn't gone their entirely not yet. >> dana: fox news alert for you here. protestors are gathering outside the supreme court as we await major opinions that could reshape the nation. the most highly anticipated the decision on abortion rights that could overturn roe v. wade. >> bill: good morning. >> dana: are you ready for this hour? >> friday and here we go from the high court releasing new decisions any moment. remember we're waiting on nine but four of those nine are significant. they could involve the future of religious liberty, border security and, of course, access to abortion in america. that decision is getting the lion's share of attention after a leak of a draft opinion in the month of may suggesting the justices would overturn roe v. wade and return that decision to the states. >> dana: fox news team coverage.

aishah hosni on the push to protect justices and their families and go to david spunt live in washington on the flurry of blockbuster decisions that come down any moment. >> any second. it is possible we get a big case today, perhaps the biggest in the term determining the future of abortion access. we have an idea where the justices stand via a preliminary draft ruling. that leaked opinion was authored in february and things may -- i say may have changed. we'll see what happens. live look outside the supreme court on this friday morning in washington the high fences around the court were installed last month in anticipation of potential unrest when the abortion ruling comes down. on december 1 of last year the justices heard a mississippi law that would outlaw abortion after 15 weeks. the justices may go further and overturn roe v. wade. the law of the land which permits abortions up to the 23, 24-week period. if roe is overturned states would make abortion policies.

many states have trigger laws to outlaw abortion immediately depending on what the high court does. if that decision does not come down today there are several others we're watching. one is separation of church and state, coach joe kennedy a former high school football coach who claims he was fired for playing on the field at the end of football games and the immigration topic. they want to stop the remain in mexico policy for migrants seeking asylum in the united states. forces thousand to wait in mexico while the claims are heard. we'll have two days of opinion releases next week before they take the break. they are back the first monday in october. >> dana: thank you. we have the first decision. we want to tell you about that. the ruling is 5-4 in favor of the valley hospital medical center which was about pregnancy center and disclosures and that was taking

place in california. that just come out. that was not one of the four that we were immediately looking at but very interesting nonetheless and again showing the power of having -- if you're on the conservative side having this kind of makeup in the court. >> bill: stay tuned for more understanding of that and we should get the next decision in about 10 minutes. while we wait there and the nation braces for a decision on abortion potentially today, senate republicans are urging the house to pass emergency funding to protect the u.s. supreme court justices and their families. aishah hosni has a view of that today. what's the update from the hill? >> good morning to you both. look, time is running out. we know that and house leadership still has not scheduled a vote on this emergency funding. it is not on the schedule for any votes they're taking today. it would this bipartisan bill sponsored by senators hagerty and warner passed unanimously in the senate this week and

deliver 10.3 million dollars to the u.s. marshal service and 9.1 million to the supreme court to address these unprecedented threats to the justices, their families and to the court employees quite possibly could include the person who leaked the abortion opinion. now this is different from what the president signed into law earlier this month. you remember that. that simply expanded federal protections to the immediate family members of the justices. this one is about money because according to g.o.p. aides, the court and u.s. marshal service are currently spending a whole lot of it on unexpected security needs not budgeted for including overtime pay. with the recent assassination attempt on justice kavanaugh and all the protests we've been watching and happening outside the justice's homes, leader mitch mcconnell was on the floor yesterday calling on the house to hurry. >> far left is promising that

all of this will only be the prelude to the main event if they don't the rulings coming down the pike. one activist group is promising our cities will be submerged in a night of rage. >> again this is a bipartisan push. they really want the house to pass this before they leave for july recess, even senator mark warner saying look at what happened with january 6 when we were not prepared with security. we need to get this done as quickly as possible. still waiting for that abortion ruling. >> bill: aishah, thank you for that on the hill there. >> dana: let me correct myself. when we were rushing to try to get the information out, there was two lawsuits against the health and human services secretary. one involves a medicare payment dispute. >> bill: the supreme court has struck down a law in washington to make it easier for certain

workers to get worker's comp from the federal government. hence the reason why kagen and sotomayor and thomas voted in the majority. one of the remaining nine. eight more to go. four big ones still on the line. >> dana: a cheat sheet for president biden. it even told the president to say take your seat and give your brief remarks. joining us now is former white house chief of staff and rnc chairman reince priebus. you can have a run of show. you can be scheduled, overscheduled. i do think in some ways they overstaff him. unless, reince, maybe he does need that kind of direction when you enter the room you should say hello. >> it's so funny that you said that part because it was the first thing i thought of, too, when i looked at all the instructions. i thought the most amazing

instruction was you enter the roosevelt room and say hello. who would enter a room full of people and not know to say hello? i also thought when i read this that it was really more about the fact that the staff is running the white house. you do not have a commander-in-chief that is in charge of making all of the detailed decisions going back to the executive orders, whether it be on the border, oil and gas leases. you name it. joe biden is every day accomplishing the liberal wish list and he is taking it for the team and you can see it in his numbers and you can see why he is now dealing with a democrat game of intrigue as far as whether he will run in 2024 or other people will. >> bill: reince, this was your job for a while, right? >> yeah. >> bill: would you ever consider telling the commander-in-chief who to talk

to, how long to speak, where to sit, where to walk, and when to leave? >> yeah, i would if i had a commander-in-chief that needed to be told, you know, every day where the bathroom is at and where the roosevelt room is at and what reporters you need to call on in order to get through the day. which is why we are dealing with a commander-in-chief that even folks in his own party know isn't ready for prime time in 2024. when you have job approval at 35, number one, and you have wrong track. everyone understands the right track, wrong track, the easiest poll question. it tells people in politics everything. do you believe the country is on the right track or the wrong track? 71% say it's on the wrong track.

the third thing that's plaguing this president is this question of do you strongly support the president? among democrats, only 20% strongly support the president. that's why he is dealing with all these other sharks in the tank that are going to new hampshire and south carolina and iowa like you all talked about in the last hour. because if only 20% strongly support you, you've got a big problem because those are the people that you need doing the yard signs, putting out the literature, being excited and hungry for you as a candidate. he doesn't have it. it is lost. so you can't outdo physics and politics. he is not only a dead duck but a lame duck when the republicans win the house in november. he has got a lot of problems. >> dana: just in fairness, though, a lot of presidents get notes. i don't know if you were the chief of staff at the time but there was the note for president trump do not congratulate to the russian

president on the sham election and also the ones when he was meeting with victims from the school shootings saying show empathy. so you give some sort of cues. whether the president needs them or not they're there on there. >> you're right. the cues are not abnormal but it's the kind of cues. not congratulating because you want to be overly friendly. that's not going to work well in foreign policy. just don't be too friendly here. that's one thing. a nuanced instruction but to say when you walk in the room say hello and by the way this person is not in the room don't look stupid by shaking a shadow's hands. this is a new level of instruction. i think you know that and i know you do. >> dana: i want to ask you about this potential list of democratic candidates. they're always showing a mini primary. you have kamala harris going to south carolina, prytzger going

to iowa, governor newsom who has been talking to the atlantic and basically that he has a muscular position here. we'll have to let you go. breaking news at the supreme court and we will get to that now. what do we see? >> bill: we're waiting on what is the remainder of eight cases to be decided. of them, the case regarding roe v. wade is now in, all right? this is the case that involves roe v. wade established 49 years ago. the decision is out. it has been issued by justice alito and roe v. wade, according to our reports from the u.s. supreme court and our own shannon bream, is that roe v. wade has been overturned and the question of abortion has been returned to the states. it has been 50 years since that

landmark supreme court ruling and conservatives in government and-in-law have been working for 50 years to overturn it and this is the live reaction now in realtime outside the u.s. supreme court in our nation's capital. >> dana: you are seeing people overjoyed about the decision in this particular shot here. and then you also have people who are obviously going to be dismayed about this. the leak happened about 56 days ago and they've been waiting for this. we do have some great team coverage for you. we believe shannon bream, are you available to us now? >> i am. and as you know, we now get these by computer. in the old days we would get the hard copies and run them down the steps. the initial first line of the read of the syllabus, not the actual opinion but it is the summary of the decision.

it says that roe and casey are overruled. the voting together stayed together alito has authored the opinion and joined by gorsuch, kavanaugh, thomas and barrett. there are a couple of concurrences. the one we're most interested will be the one by the chief justice and see what he wrote. we thought he would not be a vote sto overturn roe but that he would be somebody who might want to try some middle ground. the mississippi law which bans most abortions after 15 weeks that he would essentially probably uphold that but not want to go the extra step for roe. and the court says today that roe and casey are gone. it says we end this opinion where we began. abortion presents a profound more all question. the constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each state from regulating or prohibiting abortion. we now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected

representatives. roe v. wade and casey this vote is out. the votes are in. once its officially out the leak -- it was interesting but didn't lock these votes in. they are now officially in and roe and casey. you can hear a lot of pro-life groups behind us at the court fighting for this ever since roe and now this victory that many of them didn't think would be possible. some of them in their lifetimes. based on these states that after roe and the last couple of years have specifically passed laws they knew would go immediately to court. mississippi was one of those. many of the lawmakers involved said our ideal in this is to get this to the court to challenge roe. they knew it wouldn't stand up against initial challenges or immediately in court. so something that started a couple years ago in the state legislature has now made it to the supreme court and has done what they hoped to do. dismantle roe and casey in a 5-4 vote. we'll look at the chief's concurrence to see what thinks language on it. we never thought he was part of

the majority. the five votes to put it together. interesting to see what he says on this. but with that opinion from justice alito we'll see how closely it tracks with the draft. the bottom line doesn't change. roe and casey have been overruled. >> bill: reading two lines from the opinion here quote. there is nothing in the constitution about abortion and the constitution is not implicitly protect the right. another line. time to heed the constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people's elected representatives. quoting from that opinion to the supreme court for how the reaction is happening now live. >> yeah. and not surprising the justices that are defending would stick together. we have a couple of concurrences. the chief is the one that we'll want to look at. but let me get to the dissent here and let's see what they have to say because we know

they have been very full throated. tensions at the court. we've seen that in some of what has come out in other opinions recently. particularly from justice sotomayor has had some language about the court being reckless although she had very nice words to say about justice thomas not long ago. we know there has been some distrust. we don't have the name of the leaker who originally gave the opinion to "politico" weeks ago. what we're left with is a lot of suspicion within the court. we haven't had any updates on the leak investigation. so we don't know how close the court is or is not into finding that. here we have justice breyer, sotomayor, kagen signed their name to the dissent. instead of saying they all write and the others join. they have all three put their name on this dissent and they talk about the fact that women for nearly half a century have relied on roe v. wade. the government could not control a woman's body and the course of her life and not

determine what her future would be. they say we get the divisiveness of this particular issue. there is nothing else like it out there. but it says today the court discards balance. it says that from the moment of fertilization a woman has no rights to speak of and force her to bring a pregnancy to term even at cost. it is the lowest level of scrutiny known to the law. they have written a spirited dissent. states across the country have a lot of trigger laws that will kick in from this decision and they go to the extremes. some states it will be impossible to get a legal abortion. others i talked with a governor in colorado. people may travel, some of these states may become abortion sanctuaries, some of the states that have called themselves pro-life sanctuaries on the other side in this state

you won't be able to get an abortion. this decision confirms everything we saw from the leak weeks ago. a lot of back and forth why the court didn't get it out. until we got this official opinion today these votes were cast in stone, there was worry about these justices. we have somebody now charged with thinking about trying to assassinate justice kavanaugh. today it is official. votes are locked in. we have seven other opinions left but nobody is too worried about those at this moment. >> bill: we are watching american history and reading from the dissent. with sorrow for this court but more for the many millions of american women who lost a fundamental constitutional protection. direct quote there. andy mccarthy, jonathan turley, carrie severino. andy, let's beginning with you. >> hello, it's a great day for life. a great day for the restoration

of constitutional jurisprudence. it is just a great day. the opinion is exactly what we had reason to expect it would be in early may. the court, despite the terrible onslaught of protests and intimidation it sensed over the last seven weeks stood strong. went through its ordinary process. i suspect the reason that it took seven weeks is because of what we're seeing as we are trying to read through this, which is that each of the judges on both sides did the usual yeoman's work trying to get this done and in a shape that befits the grandeur of this occasion. a lot of us have been working for this for decades. it's a wonderful day. >> dana: jonathan turley, your

overall reaction to this breaking and historic news. >> well, it is clearly historic. this decision has not changed in its critical respects. so all of these protests did not succeed. in fact, what we thought was happening did happen. it is clear that the chief justice was trying to peel off a colleague. he admits that and states that he would have liked to get rid of part of the roe, casey line of cases dealing with viability but not overturn the cases entirely. kavanaugh's concurrence wants to put a pin on it and says look, the constitution does not speak to abortion. so you will have to deal with that issue on a state by state basis. this is not a fractured decision. it is a decision we anticipated. it is a huge victory for the pro-life movement.

a victory for former president donald trump. a lot of presidents promised to put a pro-life majority on the court. he succeeded. and i think that is one of the reasons why many people still remain loyal to him in terms of coming through on those pledges. so this is a victory for pro-life, also for president trump. but what we are going to see now is obviously the aftermath. legally this now moves to the states. most states will indeed preserve abortion rights. they have already made that clear. other states are now free to limit it. but this will go to the democratic process. and we will have these fights play out on the state level. >> bill: jonathan, on that point if you live in the state of new york or new jersey or massachusetts, would you expect anything to change in those states? >> no. the majority of citizens in the country will have no change at

all because they -- most of the population resides in states that have already protected abortion rights. you will have some limitations being imposed like the one we saw in mississippi. polls indicate that citizens do support limiting abortion rights particularly after the 15th week. a majority seem to support restrictions around the time that mississippi was imposing its restrictions. so it will be interesting to see how this plays out. most americans are in the middle on these issues. they believe that there is a right to abortion but believe that there is also limits that can be placed particularly on how late you can get an abortion in a pregnancy. >> bill: shannon may have referred to this. kavanaugh wrote a separate concurring opinion. he makes the case, dana, the constitution is neutral on abortion and argues that the

court was wrong to weigh in on roe originally in 1973 and take a side. >> dana: interesting that you point that out. that's the question i wanted to ask shannon which is for people who haven't been steeped in the details of the back and forth on this law, if this is indeed unconstitutional, as the justices have said today, then it has been unconstitutional for a long time. how is it allowed to stand for as long as it did? >> are you asking me? listen, there have been people all along that said roe was not decided on solid legal underpinning including ginsberg. she worried this kind of thing would happen. there would be a challenge that got to the legal reasoning the way roe was put together. always people on the left and pro-choice movement worried

that roe was susceptible. it has been viewed on vulnerable on a number of legal points. today is the fruition of what they were worried about and also the realization of what pro-lifers hope those places they could find that roe was weak including casey was weak and that's where they got today. they always argued they could chip away and get to this day because everybody on both sides was concerned that roe was susceptible to this. >> bill: stand by, shannon. these decisions are handed down electronically. there was a time not too long ago pre-covid where you would see an intern or colleague sprinting from the steps of the u.s. supreme court to run the decision on hard copy to our reporters and they read it as quickly as they can. today is a different deal. we're allowing our analysts to take a moment and read through the opinions to try to digest the information on behalf of what the nine justices said. 6 in favor.

3 against. bret baier joins us by telephone. this is a day in history that the pro-life movement has been pushing for for almost 50 years. >> bill and dana, good morning. it's historic, no doubt about it. politically it's an earthquake. it really is. and just looking through the political land as we often do in washington, does this have a big effect on the election coming up? perhaps on some races around the edges. democrats will try to rally the base on this issue alone. but i think the biggest message it sends is that elections have consequences and the supreme court and putting those justices on the supreme court really changes the fabric of our country. now, what was said already is important to remember, which is this is not outlawing abortion across the nation. this is not the end of abortion across the nation.

in a state that has laws that protect it, that is still available. but there are a number of states that had legislation ready to go for this very day. it will have an impact around the country and have an impact in politics and i think it is fair to say it's a historic day. >> bill: no doubt about that. political indications will be weighed in time and other pressures on the american people right now including the economy, inflation, gas prices, etc. all of it will be looked at in the months to come. andy, when you think about the composition of the courts and you think about the significance of this ruling, and you go back some 10 years to obamacare, many people thought a decision such as dobbs would be held to the very end of the session. it wasn't. does that suggest anything to

you at all? >> well no, i think they're dealing here, bill, with competing tensions on the one hand the fact that this got leaked seven weeks ago does create some pressure on the court to get the decision out the door so it doesn't -- it either happens nor appears to happen at the outside pressure work on the justices. at the same time it ratchets up security concerns about the justices and their families. another factor that pushes them in the direction of getting it out when it was ready to go. i actually thought that it would be in the last batch. i don't even know if today will be the last batch or not. nine would be an awful lot for them to get through in one day. i thought the court handled this from top to bottom in a very professional way. i hope that they would get the decision out quickly. once they didn't, i think they

were trying to show a tough spine determination that they would do their work and the kind of caliber work not only that the supreme court characteristically does but that is demanded by this moment, and when it was ready to go, they let it go. >> bill: one thing that will be very interesting, i think, dana is the opinion that's been released. how different is this from the opinion that was leaked back in may? >> dana: on another network they suggest that the majority opinion is virtually identical to the one that was leaked so we have that. jonathan, can i ask you about security for the justices and their families? we've had you on air to talk about that. i know that you had talked to other judges as well and their concern about it. we know that there have been ongoing protests outside the justice's homes. never been an arrest of any of the protestors even though it's against the law to protest in

front of their homes. the congress has just recently passed a bill to get them more security. do you know anything about what planning there is right now to deal with the aftermath? there is a ton of passion on both sides but the angry people from jane's revenge -- it's in the name. jonathan. >> people are calling for a day of rage, reason will be a stranger and what we're already seeing. people feel passionately but some that can take it to violence. they are ramp up security. in terms of federal law now that the opinion is out it is more difficult to use the law. the law was designed to allow the arrest of people who are trying to influence a pending proceeding or matter with the court. this is no longer pending. if anything, it will be less likely to arrest just for the act of protest. i think that now law

enforcement is going to really be acutely aware that there are people who are likely to lose reason, lose restraint and could well become violent. i expect they will ramp up that security. >> bill: stand by one moment. we did not know, dana, how chief justice roberts planned to vote based on the leaked memo. we have his answer today. and you wonder about the composition of the court 10 or 12 years ago when i mentioned obamacare how he sided with the liberal justices to keep that law intact. today he does not necessarily have the air cover of all those votes and justice roberts, andy mccarthy you were talking about this is other day. justice roberts can now -- he is free up to vote and pick a side in a way that he did not before. just explain that for our audience how you see it. >> well, bill, i think that when chief justice roberts not only in his first among equals

role in the chief justice and was one of the swing justices on a 5-4 court he was in a better position not only to deflect cases that he would prefer the court not to take because they were too hot potato type, but also even within the framework of the cases that the court took, he was able to narrow the issues that the court would resolve. in a 6-3 split rather than a 5-4 split, he has got much less control. it takes only 4 votes for the court to accept a case but you don't take a case if you are a justice who wants to take it unless you think you can get the five to win. so now when there were five other conservative justices besides justice roberts he is not in a position to bargain his vote and use that as

leverage to deflect cases he would rather not see the court take. they have more freedom to take cases whether he wants them or not. >> dana: i want to ask bret baier quickly to reflect on one thing. think about mitch mcconnell's decision to not have a hearing for merrick garland, the supreme court nominee of barack obama that he wanted to put forward. that is -- if you look back and you want to see a series of events that leads to today, that was a really interesting decision back then and it is having a big impact today. >> i think you are right, dana. it had a massive impact. the ability for president trump to fill the seat that enabled this vote to happen. and that is what i was talking about earlier about political consequences. you could do the opposite and it hasn't adjusted the court but when the senate races in georgia both flipped to democrat in that runoff, that

changed the dynamic as well. so what we see is implications of political moments and the merrick garland situation, what mcconnell did has it as a badge of courage and says it is one of the smartest things he thinks he ever did. democratic leaders think it is one of the worst. fascinating to wash. there will be another push to get rid of the filibuster to try to get democrats while they have control to have some piece of legislation that counters this ruling. >> bill: thank you for that. i want to bring in carrie severino. the first time we've been able to get your reaction. just in a broad sense what do you make of the history we're watching now. >> wow, this is truly a historic day. we have a majority of supreme court justices not only who know how to read the constitution as it is written but who have the courage and bravery to say in the face of you can see the violent threats

and the riots out there. but to say our job is to read the constitution. the constitution simply does not include this right. it doesn't mean it is off the table for people who want to try to enact it through legislative processes but they are taking the court out of this contentious issue finally. for the last 50 years i think it has really affected and distorted our judicial process. i'm hopeful that we can get back to judges simply continuing to read the constitution as it is written. >> bill: okay. with the majority opinion here just looking at it physically it is more than 100 pages in length including footnotes and i will give you a chance to go through it. jonathan turley has a moment now where he has been able to read as well. what sticks out to you? >> well, first of all i think it's very important to point out what is not in the opinion because people are already

taking considerable flight from reality in terms of what the court has said. the majority says in the opinion itself that this is confined to abortion. there is already statements that critical cases like griswold, and things like same sex marriage is now at risk. we have heard those suggestions in the past. the court directly deals with that and swatted back at the dissent for suggesting that saying we have stated unequivocally nothing in this opinion should cast doubt on precedents that don't concern abortions and says we have also explained why that is so. rights regarding contraception and same sex relationships are inherently different from the right to abortion. so the court puts that very plainly that people who are suggesting that this is extending beyond this field are simply ignoring what it has said and is saying in this opinion. >> dana: that's important then,

jonathan, right? that's not a small nuance. >> no. this has been sort of a talking point for the last few weeks ever since the opinion was released. many of us have pushed back on that and said there is no reason why that would be true. but here you have the court going out of its way to say enough of that. this is dealing with the right to abortion. those other rights are based on other arguments including other rights in the constitution. depending on which area we're talking about. but there is an effort to create a parade of horribles beyond the decision itself. there is legitimate reasons why many people are upset about the loss of roe and casey. the other thing to keep in mind, we talk about overturning roe and casey. casey was effectively -- roe was effectively dead. casey gutted roe and replaced it with an entirely new approach. so the court has never been on

tera firma with the logic of this right. later the court had a series of highly divided opinions on things like late abortion procedures and other issues. here is court is just saying look, we got it wrong at the beginning. they recognized it's about preserving precedent but doesn't mean you can't overturn it. brown versus board of education overturned pleasey. other cases we decide are wrong and that's what they are saying today. >> bill: thank you for that. stand by again as we get more reaction from our excellent panel, legal analysis and we'll get members of congress on here in a moment calling in by telephone. >> dana: carrie severino, can i ask you about what happens next in the state legislatures? for example, a lot of the reaction initially is along the lines of the court just overturned a constitutional

right to abortion. somebody like you will point out there was no constitutional right to an abortion in the constitution. that was contrived. and now we are back to where it should have been which is the debate in the states. so who has the ability to organize really well in the states in order to have their position win over the next couple of years? >> look, it will look very different across the country. much as we do now but just with a broader range of legislative options you'll see california and new york. no change is going to happen. if anything you are seeing them trying to expand abortion in those states. in somewhere like georgia or texas, you will see more protective laws of feetal life and it will span the range. you have a lot of states that maybe had pre-roe laws on the books and those laws then because roe is clearly

explicitly. the court said what they are doing. very clear those laws would come back into effect. some states have passed laws in the intervening years that said if roe is ever overturned this is what we want our abortion policy to be. a lot of states have already taken steps. very different directions. not all completely pro-life answers to that. it could be a wide range. you will have states that have their constitutions that might speak to it or in some cases there will be an interesting question of state courts where the constitution doesn't speak to it but a state court that does what the supreme court did in roe. we saw it in kansas recently. they brought their own right to abortion into the kansas constitution despite the fact there isn't language to that effect. some of these fights will have to be then also brought to the state court level to make sure state courts are following their state constitution. it could be constitutions that give the right to abortion and others that don't. judges need to follow what the

constitution says and not what their own policy view is. >> bill: a couple of things to add to that. 13 states mainly in the south and midwest have laws on the books that ban abortion in the event that roe is overturned which happened 40 minutes ago. another six states have near total bans and prohibitions after six weeks of pregnancy. on it goes. and people all across the country are looking at what their own state laws are and also what laws may be backed up and coming to their own state legislatures at a point very soon. back to the reaction, however. house speaker nancy pelosi weighed in. she calls this decision cruel. she condemns the ruling and she says women's rights are on the ballot come november. carey, stand by. guy benson was with us an hour ago. guy, we were talking about this before the decision came down. your reaction off the top now.

>> well, obviously this is a day that is historic. many pro-life americans have been waiting for this moment wondering if we would ever see it. now we have. it is a thunder clap in jurisprudence no beating around the bush on that. what strikes me about the reaction we see pouring in we did a dress rehearsal on this a number of weeks ago when the leaked opinion came out and essentially what we saw those weeks ago is exactly what we're seeing with the actual decision itself. a number of people on this broadcast have pointed out that just because roe v. wade is being overturned in dobbs, it does not make abortion illegal across the entire country. we will see a patchwork of abortion laws. some very permissive. some inhumanly so on the books. some much more restrictive and totally restrictive. decisions will be made by elected representatives on behalf of people who have

elected them. people who have put them and given them power. i think that's the key point here. there have been even progressive constitutional experts even the late justice ginsberg has been critical of roe v. wade, the way it was reasoned. a lot of people thought it was wrongly decided or they came at it the wrong way back in 1973. so there is the constitutional question on this, which again many conservatives have been arguing forever, for decades it was wrongly decided. there is the moral, ethical, scientific elements of any abortion debate which is going to be very emotional and very divisive. and then there is the political fallout, the political outcome we have been sort of grappling with here since the leak at the supreme court and we're getting a hint or two along the way of what it will look like and what it might not look like. vis-a-vis the upcoming elections. now the actual moment as arrived and not hypothetical,

it is here, roe is gone and history has been made. >> bill: guy, thank you. stand by along with the rest of our team. dana, the former president barack obama now tweeting out that the decision is tantamount to an attack on freedoms for millions of americans. the court's conservative majority overturning it. the decision expected to lead to abortion bans in half the states and on it goes from the former president. >> dana: it is interesting. andy mccarthy, maybe weigh in here. everybody looks at this and might have a different opinion but it is interesting to me when lawyers look at something and have such radically different opinions on that and barack obama is a lawyer. he was a constitutional law officer of our land for four years -- eight years, excuse me, it's interesting to me. get your take on that and also about mississippi had a different approach here. and you have the attorney general there in mississippi who calmly executed the case in

front of the court and is victorious today. we should talk about her a little bit. >> yeah. i would say on obama, this is kind of a microcosm of the whole problem here, which is that roe was never really law in the first place. roe was always politics and it has become a political cause. indeed, the people who tried to argue the pro roe side of the cases argued that we are supposed to uphold precedent. they couldn't make a straight faced defense of roe as constitutional law. the fact that president obama comes out with a statement that is 180 degrees different from people who are sort of rooted in constitutional law, you notice he is not making a constitutional claim here. he has some airy thing about freedom but he is not going to explain it because nobody can explain it. nobody who has had the opportunity to stand up in front of a court to try to

defend it has tried to make that argument. on mississippi, i think it's a monumental, historic moment. the people who are attached to the case obviously need to get kudos for their performance here. reading through the chief justice's opinion, what he -- i find this very ironic. i have always thought he wanted to keep the court out of the hot button cases and he generally speaking does. but what his opinion basically says is he thinks the majority goes too far. they reached out and basically decided this thing once and for all where he says he wouldn't have gone any further than just upholding the mississippi law. and i just looking at that, that would have just brought a continuing stream of abortion cases to the court where, you know, they would be in a position of saying okay, this

one is okay. just like casey. this is an undue burden, this is not an undue burden. we would have it ratcheted up emotion and controversy because there would be case after case coming to the court. whereas what the majority did here is simply decide correctly it was never something the court was supposed to be in in the first place and every second that it was in it, it was defeating democracy, which is where this is supposed to get resolved. >> bill: i made the point an hour ago in these big cases it takes a while for it to settle in and use the word marinate. you think about it. go away for the weekend and measure in your own way what the implications are. like the gun decision of yesterday. barely 24 hours old. we don't know ultimately what the implications of that ruling is for eight or nine states that have restrictive gun laws including the one we live in in new york. is it is a similar case. think about how it could impact american life or the state in

which you live and the family you are raising. however, there are three liberal justices on this court and they are none too happy about this ruling today. back to shannon bream who is reading through a lot of the dissent opinions, shannon. what do you find in there? >> well, a couple of things. first of all as we noted before, they all signed this together, all the dissenters and put their names on it. that is significant. the last time i can think about that, the last high-profile example the original obamacare case. there was flipping of votes behind is scenes and scalia, kennedy, thomas and alito wrote the fiery dissent and signed their names. sometimes they invoke extra emotions. they talk about this today. they think there has been damage to the court. they said one of us once said it is not often in the law that so few have so quickly changed so much and they are quoting

justice breyer who is signed onto this and retire in a matter of days. for all of us in our time on the court it has never been more true than today. overruling roe and casey the court betrayed its guiding principles with sorrow for this court but more for the millions of american women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection we dissent. they stick together. the chief justice we thought he was doing something like this that he may be doing a concurrence. he would have upheld the mississippi law but we don't need to go after roe. he wants to have a narrow as solution as possible. he writes this. both the court's opinion and the dissent display a relentless freedom from doubt on the legal issue that i cannot share. i would have just decided the question we granted review for. the answer to that question is no. that law is not unconstitutional in mississippi but i see no need to go further to decide this case.

so the split goes down as we would expect but again as you guys keep noting it is important for people to note this sends it back to the states. i was riding on an airplane a few days ago and a guy wanted to talk to me. he had no idea that even if roe and casey were struck down he didn't realize that it would come down to the states. when we figure out the nuance of what has been decided today. >> bill: we did a fox poll the first part of may and asked this question, dana, specifically as applies to the law in mississippi ruled on today. do you support or oppose abortion in your state after 15 weeks? a majority 54% favor a ban after 15 weeks. >> dana: right. that's what the mississippi law is. jonathan turley maybe jump in here. this is not in mississippi,

it's actually quite a lot longer than in many places around the world. >> that's right. we're talking about that 15-week period. sometimes that period is called the quickening period. a term that came from early in our republic and also in england where the criminalization of abortion the ended to follow what was called the quickening or first sensation of a pregnancy. mississippi put their date right around that traditional period of the quickening. it turned out that that was not going to be the issue in the case. ultimately you had five justices who believed that roe and casey were built on what they believe to be bad law. reading the roberts concurrence, which i've done, is really a great example of what an incrementalist and institutionalist he is.

it will probably be cited to capture roberts' view of what judging on this court is all about. he doesn't necessarily disagree that roe and casey were not constitutionally sound. he just frankly gets sticker shock. he believes that should be cautious and incremental and not make the sudden turns on precedent. he said i would uphold the mississippi law but i wouldn't get rid of them entirely. a lot of people will read that and saying it's divorced from principle. it's very clear principles how to interpret the constitution. is it there or not? roberts is unabashedly saying it's not the only consideration. i just think that we did more than we had to do. >> dana: thank you.

congressman mike johnson of louisiana, republican congressman, is joining us by phone. let's get your reaction to this historic news today. >> this is a big day. 49 years it has taken to reverse this great tragedy. there is no right to abortion in the constitution. there never was. it is not in its text or structure or meaning and the court has finally said that decisively. many of us have been working for this day our entire adults lives and it is a great joyous occasion. listen, when the court invented the right to abortion, the federal right to abortion out of thin air and said it was found in the constitution they imposed a tragically consequential social policy on america. as a result, nearly -- more than 63 million unborn american children have perished because of it. we have to reverse that. we finally have. we cannot overstate the importance of the day. >> bill: is this a surprise, however, or not so much given

the composition of the court? >> i don't think it is a surprise. we knew we had a majority of originalists who want to apply the constitution as it's written. this is the result. abortion is not mentioned in the constitution and it is nowhere in its original meaning. so you have justices who are faithful to that interpretation, that application of the constitution. that's what the founding fathers intended and our nation relied upon and now it's returned to the people to be decided by the people through their duly elected representatives in most cases and where it always belonged. it has been a legal fiction in our lives. finally we get to make this decision where it always should have been made. >> bill: you mentioned the political aspect of that. that has begun already. sir, thank you for your time. the house speaker is already at the microphone on the hill. some 45 minutes.

>> nationwide abortion ban. they cannot be allowed to have majority in the congress to do that. but that's their goal. and if you read and again we're all studying all this but if you read what is in the very clear, one of the justices had his own statement, it's about contraception, inveto fertilization, family planning, that is all what will spring from their decision that they made today. such a contradiction. yesterday to say the states cannot make laws governing the constitutional right to bear arms, and today they are saying the exact reverse, that the

states can overturn a constitutional right for 50 years, a constitutional right to a woman having a right to choose. the hypocrisy is raging but the harm is endless. what this means to women is such an insult, it is a slap in the face to women about using their own judgment to make their own decisions about their reproductive freedom. and again it goes -- i always have said the termination of a pregnancy is just their opening act and front game. behind it and for years i have seen in this congress opposition to any family planning, domestic or global. when we have had those discussions and those debates and those votes on the floor of the house.

this is deadly serious. but we are not going to let this pass. a woman's right to choose, reproductive freedom is on the ballot in november. we cannot allow them to take -- [inaudible] which is to criminalize reproductive freedom. to criminalize it. right now they are saying in states they can arrest doctors and all the rest. what is happening here? what is happening here? a woman's fundamental health decisions are her own to make in consultation with her doctor, her faith, her family, not some right wing politicians that donald trump and mitch mcconnell packed the court with. while republicans seek to punish and control women,

democrats will keep fighting ferociously to enshrine roe v. wade into the law of the land. this cruel ruling is outrageous and heart wrenching but make no mistake, it's all on the ballot in november. supreme court has ended a constitutional right. this is 50 years proclaimed a constitutional right. what happened today was historic in many respects. historic in that it had not granted recognized a constitutional right and then reversed it. this is a first. and again, just before it imposed a constitutional right to allow for concealed weapons. how about those justices coming before the senators and saying

that they respected the precedent of the court, that they respected the right of privacy in the constitution of the united states? did you hear that? were they not telling the truth then? again, just getting to the gun issue because really in preparation for this morning i was really an exalted state about what happened in the united states senate yesterday. counter point to the dangerous decisions of this trumpian supreme court that they made yesterday. what a way to take us to as the bill is called community safe. >> bill: the first of a lot of reaction starting this hour, dana. and you think about the gun ruling yesterday, the abortion ruling today. what is still out there, the epa on climate change.

remain in mexico deals directly with the border and immigration. religious liberty that deals with prayer in public schools. america you could argue is being transformed right now by this conservative court. 6-3 ruling on abortion. >> dana: on abortion and then what nancy pelosi just said one of the things she said dramatically decrease abortions. that could be but a state like california nothing is going to change at this moment in california and the states that have very permissive abortion rights they have already said we'll become the destination for abortion. there will be some questions that have to be answered. i think that dissent is very narrow from judge roberts is very interesting about contraception still okay, gay marriage. let's be specific about what this is and what it is not. i didn't hear that from nancy

pelosi but maybe she didn't have a chance to read the whole thing. >> bill: who is the leaker? how have they handled this on the inside? there was a lot of thought they would try to figure out the leaked case first before they put out a substantial case ruling on abortion. maybe that is or is not the case. we don't know. this is a critical time for these nine justices in the history. >> dana: so much more to come today. coverage continues. harris faulkner is up next. >> we continue our breaking news coverage here on fox news. historic decision from the u.s. supreme court overturned roe v. wade. i'm harris faulkner and you are in "the faulkner focus". it's a monumental ruling from a deeply divided supreme court eliminating the constitutional right to an abortion. the split ruling also upholds mississippi's ban on abortions after 15 weeks and the state's law, the one that triggered the legal battle at